Republican State Sen. Todd Weiler and the Disability Law Center seem to be talking past each other.
Weiler said he wants more oversight for the protection and advocacy organization, so he’s taking a two-pronged approach. One is a resolution, SJR7, that seeks to turn the heat up on the center by instructing the governor to evaluate its work, and the second, SB154, would put guidelines in place for future reporting to the state.
Meanwhile, the Disability Law Center has defended its work, posting on Instagram in late January to urge its supporters to voice concerns over the resolution. The joint resolution asks Gov. Spencer Cox to evaluate the center’s performance over the past decades and determine if it still deserves the designation as a protection and advocacy agency.
Protection and advocacy agencies are private, nonprofit organizations that exist, per federal guidelines, to legally advocate for people with disabilities. They receive millions of dollars in federal grants to do so, though it’s up to individual states to decide which organization gets this title.
Utah’s Disability Law Center has been the state’s designee since 1978.
“It's been 48 years since they were designated,” Weiler said. “And I think a little bit of accountability is good for every organization that's receiving taxpayer money.”
His chief worry is that the Disability Law Center isn’t serving all disabled Utahns equally. Weiler said he’s heard complaints from families that the agency isn’t advocating for people with high needs and low functionality, and that his goal with the joint resolution is to give the agency a chance to refute these claims or commit to advocating for those groups.
He’s doing this, officially, by asking the governor to perform an in-depth review to identify whether or not it’s advocating correctly. And, if appropriate, to redesignate the protection and advocacy title to a different agency. Weiler said he thinks plenty of other institutions would be willing to take up the mantle, including Utah State University.
“I don't think competition is bad,” he said.
But Weiler’s tactics have widely turned the conversation away from oversight and toward whether or not the Disability Law Center is a beneficial organization.
In a Feb. 4 meeting of the Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee, the center’s supporters focused on the good the agency had done. They spoke about success stories and the harm that would come if the governor took away the center’s protection and advocacy status.
Nate Crippes, the public affairs supervising attorney at the Disability Law Center, said he doesn’t believe the resolution is only about accountability.
“I think this starts the redesignation process,” he said at the committee meeting.
Not everyone sees redesignation as a bad thing. Several parents voiced grievances over how difficult it is to retain guardianship over their adult children with severe disabilities, and alleged the Disability Law Center has fought to keep it that way. They urged senators to vote in favor of the resolution.
But Crippes said these comments were misguided.
“We're tasked with representing people with disabilities," he said. “And by representing parents, we would actually be adversarial with our clients.”
Furthermore, he said his organization is federally prohibited from advocating for families and guardianship, and if that’s the only reason to look into funding cuts, then it doesn’t make sense. Crippes said he isn’t against some oversight from the governor, but in this case, he doesn’t feel there's good cause.
The Disability Law Center has taken a more favorable approach to Weiler’s other legislation. It would introduce requirements for the protection and advocacy agency to give an annual report to state legislators and to hold at least three public meetings throughout the state.
Crippes said the Disability Law Center already adheres to most of the bill’s requirements, and while they don’t find it necessary, the final decision isn’t up to them.
Unlike Weiler’s proposed resolution, which only requests the governor to look into the issue, SB154 would enact immediate change. The bill also has bipartisan support. The committee unanimously voted to send it forward with a favorable recommendation. Both of Weiler’s measures have cleared the committee and are on the floor in the Senate.
Ethan Rauschkolb is an intern with Amplify Utah and KUER covering the Utah State Legislature and other local news.
